View Single Post
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sun Feb 11, 2001, 01:12pm
chris s chris s is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 508
Cool

Quote:
Originally posted by JJ
Question: Why are people more than willing to ramble on about the do's and don'ts of WHY a call should or shouldn't be made, but unwilling to actually MAKE a call (for example, on the play I outlined above)? I was really hoping I could pick the collective brains here for a ruling on this play, and instead I get "Gee, I didn't know they changed the rule..."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~
The FED time of pitch ruling is very screwed up, actually WAS. Couple years ago I had a coach go off on me (BU) cuz kid would engage with hands apart, then bring them together and stop(just like OBR). His bitch was cuz his R3 would use the initial movement of F1's arms to get his secondary lead. I had no freaking clue(1st yaer of FED), my partner was an old deaf (hearing impaired) Smitty with 15 years of FED ball, he had no clue. I asked BobP on McGriffs about this, his response was much clearer than the book at that time.I understood the rule, not the reasoning(but thats FED).

I feel the new, redefined TOP is very clear. It could be better stated as a "commitment to pitch", thats what I believe the basis of TOP is all about. I also believe the FEDS big interest in this is that a lot of pitchers use wind-up with a R3 only, thus the R3 must have some clue as to when the F1 has committed to pitch, past the point of no return, so to speak.
Reply With Quote